Was the first whitaker/Ramriez fight judged fairly?

[joseph5620]

------R----W
1-----9---10-----w dominant, great use of jab, boxing lesson
2-----9---10-----ditto, also landing straight left crosses
3-----9---10-----w dominant, more exchange. W too fast
4-----9---10-----closer, w just edged it though
5-----9---10-----ditto
6-----10---9-----felt that ramirez may have edged this one
7-----10---9-----similar to previous
8-----10---9-----definitely r's round
9-----9---10-----w widens gap again and boxes better
10----10---9-----w with volume, r with harder shots
11----10---9-----very close, pretty much ditto of prev
12----9---10-----close but w gets the better
-----113---115

It's your scorecard which is subjective so I won't argue too much about it. But watching that fight I don't see any way three straight rounds could be given to Ramirez at any point. Giving Ramirez five rounds is even more far fetched to me. We just saw two different fights.

[Humean]

It's your scorecard which is subjective so I won't argue too much about it. But watching that fight I don't see any way three straight rounds could be given to Ramirez at any point. Giving Ramirez five rounds is even more far fetched to me. We just saw two different fights.

The three in a row I gave to Ramirez were close rounds so I don't think in those particular rounds that it was clear cut one way or another. It was a few months ago that I scored it but I think that what made me give Ramirez the rounds I gave him was body work and driving Whitaker to the ropes. Ramirez was being the 'ring general' in those rounds, Whitaker's jab was not being as effective in those particular rounds. Whichever way you slice it there is no way Ramirez won more than 5 rounds and If i've been too kind to Ramirez then he was more deserving of of 2,3 or 4 rounds. One of the judges had him winning 10 rounds! That judge must hate movement, jabs and defence.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I will be the first to admit if im wrong,,, I need to rewatch it in its entirety.... and score it,,,

i just watched 8-12 and thought that pernell did good but so did ramirez,, ramirez was def the aggressor and pernell got hit with some clean shots, but he also made him miss alot...

I tend to think that this fight was similar to the hopkins-calzaghe in that you have a defender making the guy miss, but not landing a whole lot himself,,,,,,,

Just my opinion,,, and i mostly certainly could be wrong,,, I just dont think its the biggest robbery ever, or even top 5,,, I have seen alot worse....